Gumbao v. Aurora Bank FSB et al

Filing 5

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY REMOVAL IS PROPER. Defendants must show cause why removal is proper by 9/11/2013. Defendants must also consent or decline jurisdiction of a magistrate judge by 9/11/2013. Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 8/27/13. (Attachments: # 1 Consent / Declination)(lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/27/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

10
11 FELICIDAD GUMBAO,

Case No. 13-cv-03952 NC

12

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
REMOVAL IS PROPER

13

Plaintiff,
v.

14 AURORA BANK, et al.,
15

Re: Dkt. No. 1

Defendants.

16
17

On August 26, 2013, defendants Nationstar Mortgage LLC and Aurora Bank FSB

18 removed this action to federal court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. Dkt. No. 1 at 2.
19 The notice of removal states that the action was initiated in state court on April 12, 2013.
20 Id. at 2, 8. Defendants further state that their removal is timely “as the thirty-day period
21 never commenced (or expired)” because “Plaintiff has not filed any proof of service
22 alleging service on either Nationstar or Aurora.” Id. at 5.
23

In general, a defendant wishing to remove an action to federal court must file a notice

24 of removal “within 30 days after the receipt by the defendant, through service or otherwise,
25 of a copy of the initial pleading setting forth the claim for relief upon which such action or
26 proceeding is based, or within 30 days after the service of summons upon the defendant if
27 such initial pleading has then been filed in court and is not required to be served on the
28 defendant, whichever period is shorter.” 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1). The federal courts “have
Case No. 13-cv-03952 NC
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

pendent obligation to determine whether subj
d
w
ject-matter jurisdiction exists, eve in
n
en
1 an indep
ence of a challenge from any party Arbaug v. Y&H C
m
y.”
gh
Corp., 546 U 500, 514
U.S.
2 the abse
t
r
d]
inal
ent
rs
district
3 (2006). “If at any time [after removal and before fi judgme it appear that the d
cks
sdiction, the case shall be remand
e
l
ded.” 28 U.
.S.C. § 1447
7(c).
4 court lac subject matter juris

5

Fi defenda have not shown th their rem
irst,
ants
hat
moval is tim becaus they have not
mely
se
e

w
n
ve
ved,
they have, t date of s
the
service.
6 stated whether or not they hav been serv and if t

7

Se
econd, the notice of rem
n
moval does not adequa
s
ately state t citizensh of Natio
the
hip
onstar

poses of diversity jurisd
diction. Wh the not states th Nationstar is a “lim
hile
tice
hat
mited
8 for purp
”
hat
star
verse defen
ndant” under the rule
9 liability company,” it argues th Nations is a “div
ng
hip
kt.
er,
partnership, an
10 regardin citizensh of corporations. Dk No. 1 at 3. Howeve “like a p
0
e
ts
members are citizens.” Johnson v
e
v.
11 LLC is a citizen of every state of which it owners/m
1
age,
7
Cir.
Cosgrove v.
12 Columbia Properties Anchora LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th C 2006); C
2
tta,
998). Therefore, Natio
onstar must inform the Court
t
e
13 Bartolot 150 F.3d 729, 731 (7th Cir. 19
3
itizenship of all of its members. Moreover, i any memb of Natio
m
M
if
ber
onstar is its a
self
14 of the ci
4
ciation (or another LLC), the Cou needs to know the c
a
urt
o
citizenship of each
15 partnership or assoc
5
ember” as well. V & M Star, LP v. Centimar Corp., 59 F.3d 354 356 (6th C
w
v
rk
96
4,
Cir.
16 “sub-me
6

17 2010).
7
18
8

Accordingly, by Septem
,
mber 11, 201 defenda must sh cause i writing w
13,
ants
how
in
why

moval is pro
oper by add
dressing the Court’s co
oncerns iden
ntified abov If defen
ve.
ndants
19 their rem
9
at
w
,
will
d
n
ourt
20 do not establish tha removal was proper, the Court w remand this action to state co
0
y
er
21 and may order othe relief as justice requires.
1

22
2

Defendants must also co
m
onsent or de
ecline the ju
urisdiction o a magistr judge b
of
rate
by

ber
3.
ched consen
nt/declinati forms.
ion
23 Septemb 11, 2013 See attac
3

24
4

IT IS SO OR
T
RDERED.

25
5

Date: August 27, 2013
t

26
6

_________
__________
____
_____
Nath
hanael M. C
Cousins
Unit States M
ted
Magistrate J
Judge

27
7
28
8
Case No. 13-cv-0395 NC
52
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
R

2